User talk:Caiordo

Re:Dragonfly CMS

Hi, the problem with your edit to the article was that you copy pasted from another internet site, which is not compatible with the GFDL. Jackaranga 16:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not. Pass me the URL and I'll be ok.

Also i see that you are actually "helping" other writers, something that is not happening on my case. I've just registered to "save" and "improve the article" and all I'm getting is "deletion" requests.

Also if you are talking about the "history" ... well the "history" its the same world wide as well as dates and fact that happened on the past. Just like "history" that we use to study at school.

As I've previously stated: It all comes from my hands. I want to improve the article, I'm a busy person in my real life and I need some time to finish the page without seen the page marked for deletion every day. If you think that I'll be able to "improve" the article then, please, help me as well you do with others. Otherwise delete the article as soon as possible.

Thanks Caiordo 05:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry I couldn't answer you sooner, I think we don't live at all in the same time zone. Am I correct in thinking you were editing as User:202.173.180.252 at the time ? If not you can discard all this conversation. If that was you then, I removed what you had added because it was a copy paste of the software change log. You can find it here. Jackaranga 12:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, that user and me are the same persons. That page its no protected by any copy rights, "history" cannot be a copy rights violation otherwise that it would be one "history" school book world wide and as you may notice it cannot be a copy and past. By the way in a second edit I've even removed the "history" part, which i didn't even liked because wasn't a well formatted paragraph. I'm really trying to improve the article and you keep going with "your last chance". Could you please give me break? Caiordo 19:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}

Helpme template

I notice that you placed a helpme template on this page. Is there something we can help you with? If so, please reply with the question. I will keep your talk page watched for the question, however it may be quicker if you add another {{helpme}} template along with the question. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 06:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Nick, I'm trying to understand how to request an admin supervision to definitively rule my above problem. I've been in the following articles WP:RFAA, WP:RFAR, WP:AN, and WP:AE and I'm still not sure which is the correct one and how i should correctly proceed. Caiordo 09:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of those will do that, however, if you wish you could venture over to WP:ADOPT, or contact an admin directly. There is a list of admins here. :) -- Stwalkerster talk 11:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats great, in this case I need an admin, then if the article will not be deleted I'll love to be adopted by an experienced user. Caiordo 11:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, if you would like a quicker response from an admin, you should look at the options listed on Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention instead of relying on one admin like myself who is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

That said, I assume that you have read WP:AFD, and you know that the fate of any article posted there is determined by consensus. Theoretically, it is suppose to be like a jury trial where any Wikipedia user who makes a comment is part of the jury, and the admin who processes the discussion is a neutral judge who carries out the jury's decision. (I say theoretically, because there are few admins who do not view it that way, but that is another story...)

Therefore, I can only give my opinion, but not enact a definite rule. Looking at the current version of the Dragonfly CMS, I do not see anything that shows that, as Wikipedia:Notability says, Dragonfly CMS "has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Using the general notability guidelines as a checklist, I only see two external links to the CMS' documentation, but no other references or sources.

As for Jackaranga's claims of copyrighted content, it is hard to tell unless he tells us the exact web site or source where he thinks it came from.

You may want to check out guidelines on how to write a great article and what is a perfect article. But the main thing you have to do is cite reliable sources showing that it is notable. Then again, there are also some users who have been known to reject nominations for deletion that have been only inadequately researched, much like a comment made by Ubernostrum on the deletion discussion. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the page is in my comment above. Here is the link again :

here

Jackaranga 15:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]